Talk:Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Political parties High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force.

Wikified ALDE in PACE section

I have wikified the ALDE in PACE section of this article. However, it still needs verification, and, although I excised the most obvious offenders, is still dangerously close to POV. -- kaosfere 20:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Should there not be an infobox for Eurogroups, like for parties proper? ALDE and EPP-ED are how they are represented in parliament, some small box would be good wouldn't it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JLogan (talk • contribs) 21:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Two ALDEs

Why not having two separate articles on the two ALDEs? --Checco (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four, actually. And precisely because, unlike UEN-EA, it's largely coherent and homogenous in all assemblies. —Nightstallion 17:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merging proposal

Why not merging the page with the Eu group? It is pretty confusing, especially for wikilinks with other languages. Some speak about both ALDE in same page and no idea where to re-link them. The group can be presented as EU parl and then added that it was constituted also as international alliance in other organs. would be much easier--88.103.17.38 (talk) 13:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your proposal above. The articles should not be merged. The reasons are as follows:

Legislative groups get separate articles from their party/alliance

The ALDE group in the EP is a set (of people) with a defined date of creation, founding documents, rules and membership. The ALDE alliance is a larger set with differences. This situation exists in many assemblies: examples in the US include the separate articles for Democratic Party (United States), Republican Party (United States), Democratic Caucus of the United States Senate, Democratic Caucus of the United States House of Representatives, Republican Conference of the United States Senate, Republican Conference of the United States House of Representatives.

Size considerations

The merged articles would be prohibitatively large. As the article expands to include the PACE,COR and NATO groups, it would get worse.

Consistency with other articles

Each EP group gets its own article: the sole exception is PES, and that will be rectified before June 09.

In short, the current structure reflects reality, matches other Wikiarticles, won't get too big and allows for future expansion.

Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant article

This article is essentially redundant and should be merged with Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group. Anyone disagree?--Autospark (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071021154151/http://cor.europa.eu/alde/ to http://www.cor.europa.eu/alde

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing semi-protection

Hi everyone,

I am proposing to semi-protect the following pages: The Left in the European Parliament – GUE/NGL, European Conservatives and Reformists Party, Renew Europe, Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, Europe of Sovereign Nations (party), Europe of Sovereign Nations Group, and Patriots for Europe. The same message is copy-pasted on all of the relevant talk pages, so that the merits of this proposal can be discussed for each of these pages.

My reasoning is the same for all pages: all of them have been the victim of recurring vandalism over the past few weeks, where (mostly) anonymous users change the ideology of the party/group without sources or discussion. Mostly, this is done to remove "far-right" (often when the ideology is "right-wing to far-right"), change "far-right" to "right-wing", remove "center-right" (when the ideology is "center to center-right"), change "center-right" to "center-left", or change "left-wing" to "far-left". These changes are often quickly reverted, but their continued occurrence is problematic. Semi-protecting the page would prevent anonymous users from making such edits.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of quality edits are made from registered accounts, which would not be affected by the semi-protection. This is particularly true since these pages are part of a rather niche group (European parties and parliamentary groups) that is very rarely edited by non-wikipedians. As a result, I do not think that the semi-protection would have a negative impact on the continued development of these pages.

Happy to discuss! Julius Schwarz (talk) 11:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oppose the page has not facing a serious problem. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I follow many pages and this probably conflates my view of the issue. Maybe it's been happening less so on this specific page. I still think it's an issue and that a semi-protection would not be detrimental, but I do recognise that it's more problematic on other pages. Julius Schwarz (talk) 18:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]